It's an quirky little paradox that big tables are usually fine with a small sample, but small tables need the best possible stats. An error of 'a couple of rows' in a small table is, after all, likely to be a significant percentage error. Regards Jonathan Lewis http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html Optimising Oracle Seminar - schedule updated July 20th ----- Original Message ----- From: "Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx> take note of how many records you add to relatively *small* tables. 13 rows added to one of our tables caused hell until we gathered stats again (and it took ages for anyone to admit that anything ahd changed). That would be 13 rows in the sense of another financial year to add to the 2 existing ones - so hardly significant at all :). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------